The Texas Forensic Science Commission recent­ly closed its inquiry into the case of Cameron Todd Willingham (pic­tured), who was exe­cut­ed in Texas in 2004. The Commission was told by the Texas Attorney General that it did not have juris­dic­tion to rule on the Willingham case. Hence, in its final report on October 28 on the mat­ter, it declined to issue any find­ing regard­ing alle­ga­tions of neg­li­gence or mis­con­duct by the City of Corsicana or the Texas State Fire Marshal in the Willingham mat­ter. The Commission, how­ev­er, acknowl­edged that out­dat­ed sci­ence regard­ing arsons played a role in Willingham’s 1991 mur­der con­vic­tion. Willingham was con­vict­ed of set­ting the fire that killed his three daugh­ters. Since then, mod­ern fire experts have deter­mined that none of the more than 20 arson indi­ca­tors iden­ti­fied by the stan­dards of arson sci­ence in 1991 are reli­able evi­dence of inten­tion­al fire. Experts say that the cause of fire should have been unde­ter­mined.” Stephen Saloom, pol­i­cy direc­tor for the Innocence Project in New York, said, The world should now know that the evi­dence relied upon to con­vict and exe­cute Cameron Todd Willingham for the fire that killed his daugh­ters was based on sci­en­tif­i­cal­ly invalid and unre­li­able evi­dence.” The Commission’s final report also includ­ed a com­mit­ment from the state fire marshal’s office to review old arson rul­ings to deter­mine whether con­vic­tions were based on the now-debunked science.”

(C. Lindell, Willingham inquiry ends, but effects linger,” Austin American-Statesman, October 29, 2011; see also Addendum To The April 15, 2011 Report Of The Texas Forensic Science Commission – Willingham/​Willis Investigation,” October 28, 2011 ). See Innocence and Studies.

Citation Guide